Deep learning techniques in computer vision (CV) tasks such as object detection, classification, and tracking can be facilitated using predefined markers on those objects. Selecting markers is an objective that can potentially affect the performance of the algorithms used for tracking as the algorithm might swap similar markers more frequently and, therefore, require more training data and training time. Still, the issue of marker selection has not been explored in the literature and seems to be glossed over throughout the process of designing CV solutions. This research considered the effects of symbol selection for 2D-printed markers on the neural network’s performance. The study assessed over 250 ALT code symbols readily available on most consumer PCs and provided a go-to selection for effectively tracking n-objects. To this end, a neural network was trained to classify all the symbols and their augmentations, after which the confusion matrix was analysed to extract the symbols that the network distinguished the most. The results showed that selecting symbols in this way performed better than the random selection and the selection of common symbols. Furthermore, the methodology presented in this paper can easily be applied to a different set of symbols and different neural network architectures.

Many deep-learning computer vision systems analyse objects not previously observed by the system. However, such tasks can be simplified if the objects are marked beforehand. A straightforward method for marking is printing 2D symbols and attaching them to the objects. Selecting these symbols can affect the performance of the CV system, as similar symbols may require extended training time and a larger training dataset. It is possible to find good symbols differentiated by the given neural network easily. Still, there were no efforts to generalise such findings in the literature, and it is not known if the symbols optimal for one network would work just as well in the other. We explored how transferable symbol selection is between the networks. To this end, 30 sets of randomly selected and augmented symbols were classified by-five neural networks. Each network was given the same training dataset and the same training time. Results were ranked and compared, which allowed the identification of networks which performed similarly so that the symbol selection could be generalised between them.

The number of loan requests is rapidly growing worldwide representing a multi-billion-dollar business in the credit approval industry. Large data volumes extracted from the banking transactions that represent customers’ behavior are available, but processing loan applications is a complex and time-consuming task for banking institutions. In 2022, over 20 million Americans had open loans, totaling USD 178 billion in debt, although over 20% of loan applications were rejected. Numerous statistical methods have been deployed to estimate loan risks opening the field to estimate whether machine learning techniques can better predict the potential risks. To study the machine learning paradigm in this sector, the mental health dataset and loan approval dataset presenting survey results from 1991 individuals are used as inputs to experiment with the credit risk prediction ability of the chosen machine learning algorithms. Giving a comprehensive comparative analysis, this paper shows how the chosen machine learning algorithms can distinguish between normal and risky loan customers who might never pay their debts back. The results from the tested algorithms show that XGBoost achieves the highest accuracy of 84% in the first dataset, surpassing gradient boost (83%) and KNN (83%). In the second dataset, random forest achieved the highest accuracy of 85%, followed by decision tree and KNN with 83%. Alongside accuracy, the precision, recall, and overall performance of the algorithms were tested and a confusion matrix analysis was performed producing numerical results that emphasized the superior performance of XGBoost and random forest in the classification tasks in the first dataset, and XGBoost and decision tree in the second dataset. Researchers and practitioners can rely on these findings to form their model selection process and enhance the accuracy and precision of their classification models.